On 1/19/07, Corey Edwards <tensai at zmonkey.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-01-19 at 15:08 -0700, Lars Rasmussen wrote:
> > On 1/18/07, Daniel C. <dcrookston at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 1/18/07, Lars Rasmussen <lars.rasmussen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I'd also like to see a wiki with information on local companies that
> > > > would allow candidates and employees to share their experiences/rate
> > > > companies.
> > >
> > > Hold on, let me get you an opener for that can of worms you're holding.
> >
> > Absolutely. Some things will likely continue more via word of mouth,
> > but wouldn't it be great to have a wiki that allowed this kind of
> > specific info?
> >
> > Example: I really liked company B due to their excellent benefits,
> > but expect regular layoffs about every 6 months.
>> And then brace yourself for a libel lawsuit. Justified or not, that
> would not be fun.
A libel lawsuit? I think not. That was decided over 3 years ago.
Flame on, call folks names if you wish, but as a website operator
there is no need for concern in the context mentioned.
Wired News: Bloggers Gain Libel Protection
"Jun, 30, 2003
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last Tuesday that Web
loggers, website operators and e-mail list editors can't be held
responsible for libel for information they republish, extending
crucial First Amendment protections to do-it-yourself online
publishers."
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,59424,00.html
FindLaw's Writ - Ramasastry: Is an Online Encyclopedia, Such as
Wikipedia, Immune From Libel Suits?
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20051212.html
FACE Intel (http://www.faceintel.com/FAQ.htm) has been around since
1996, and Intel has no shortage of legal resources.
Here's a local website example of a libel lawsuit being dismissed:
http://www.rcfp.org/news/2000/0622utahvl.html
No legal/liability can of worms to see here. Move along.
--
Lars